December 28, 2009

Thank You, Charles Krauthammer

Filed under: Taxes & Government — Tom @ 10:17 pm

Rephrasing what I’ve mentioned a couple of times in the past week, when we desperately need an updated version of the December 1981 model of Ronald Reagan, we instead get the 2009 clunker known as Barack Obama.

Charles Krauthammer rips into Obama’s relative indifference (HT Taxman Blog), after Fox’s fair and balanced Jim Engel attempted to give President ‘Prompter cover for having uttered “strong words”:

Full Text:

President Obama: The decision of Iraq’s leaders to govern through fear and tyranny will not succeed in making those aspirations go away. As I said in Oslo, it’s telling when governments fear the aspirations of its own people more than the power of any other nation.

Jim Engel: Now, strong words, Charles, but what is the administration doing? What can it do with a regime that is so obstreperous?

Charles Krauthammer: Flaccid words. Meaningless words. He talks about aspirations, he talks about rights, he talks about “justice” in the statement he made. This isn’t about “justice,” this isn’t about a low minimum wage, this isn’t about the absence of a public option in health care. This is about freedom.

This is a revolution in the streets. Revolutions happen quickly. There is a moment here in which if the thugs in the streets who are shooting on the crowds stop shooting, it’s over, and the regime will fall. The courage of the demonstrators and their boldness isn’t only a demonstration of their courage, it’s an indication of a shift in the balance of power. The regime is weakening.

This is a hinge of history. Everything in the region will change if the regime is changed. Obama ought to be strong out there in saying “It’s an illegitimate government, we stand shoulder to shoulder with the people in the street.”

He talks about diplomacy. He should be urging our Western allies who have relations to cut them off, isolate the regime. To ostracize it he ought to be going into UN, every forum, and denouncing it. This is a moment in history and he’s missing it.

Ronald Reagan didn’t miss it. You’ll note in his December 23, 1981 speech that he announced specific symbolic and substantive actions. They weren’t overwhelming by any stretch, but they demonstrated a willingness to do something beyond complaining. And of course, Thatcher, Pope John Paul, the AFL-CIO’s Lane Kirkland, and many others also started doing a lot of heavy lifting behind the scenes.

By contrast, Barack Obama is from all appearances avoiding doing anything, and even seems to require convincing to get in front of a microphone.

Not only is Obama missing the moment, he is doing way too much to give the regime of Khamenei, who really runs things, and his puppet Ahmadinejad legitimacy they do not deserve.

Elections matter, don’t they?


Related: Michelle Malkin on Obama’s response to Flight 253 — “Perfunctory, hasty, and bloodless.” Obama’s reax to the attempted takedown is related to the situation in Iran because Iran funds and facilitates Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula, which would include Yemen.



  1. [...] II: Krauthammer not having any of what Obama is selling Comments [...]

    Pingback by Obama and Doing vs Being – UPDATED » The Anchoress | A First Things Blog — December 29, 2009 @ 6:31 pm

  2. [...] and rallied the nation together? Obama isn’t quite as inspiring or comforting. Check out Charle’s Krauthammer’s response to Obama’s dry, meaningless [...]

    Pingback by Obama’s Uninspiring, Tired, Meaningless Speech on the Terrorist Attacks : Stop The ACLU — December 29, 2009 @ 10:44 pm

  3. [...] Hood massacre and Northwest Flight 253. And Obama hasn’t completed his first term. Frankly, I think the description “flaccid” should replace the term “dithering” as the… (yes, Obama, I do know a smattering of [...]

    Pingback by Happy 2010, My Friends! I will be back; hopefully to affect change! « Temple of Mut — December 30, 2009 @ 9:04 am

  4. But this is the same trend in his other speeches – he talked about the world standing together to defeat communism which was wrong – the world did not stand together – eastern Europe was under the thumb of the USSR (and fought back in ways that they could); Africa was too messed up to do anything; southeast Asia was in the grasp of China (another ‘friendly’ country); western Europe went along to get along – it was only the US, UK, Canada, and some other countries that were consistent in their opposition to the USSR (and as a Canadian I can only say that we did it partially – that idiot Trudeau was a great friend of communist countries – it took Mulroney to get us back on track).

    Obama prefers to see his own view of history is is all happy unicorns.

    Comment by Maureen — December 30, 2009 @ 10:40 am

  5. #4, what’s really offensive is that presidential speeches having the staying power to serve as potential rewrites of history.

    In the US, the Dems’ instant pivot to “we were all anti-Communists” as the Wall fell remains one of the more spectacular lies ever told.

    Comment by TBlumer — December 30, 2009 @ 10:44 am

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.